5 ms·

There are people who study and investigate this kind of things who probably have good reasons to believe this object served some kind of ritualistic purpose. >

• deleted 6y ago
  [deleted]
• marcus_holmes 6y ago
  > Do not project the hyper-rationalistic character of our current society to societies and civilizations of the pre-industrial era. People in the ancient times were not as rational and utilitarian as we are. I think it's much, much more the other way around. Modern archaeologists have inherited their Victorian predecessors attitudes, who tended to look on primitive societies as backward and superstitious; "nasty, brutal and short". > Everything was permeated by religion, superstition and magic. I don't think there's much evidence to support this. Lots of speculation and interpretation, but not much actual evidence. A girl wearing a "sun disk" is interpreted as being a "priestess of a sun religion". On what basis? Can't it just be decoration? Again, saying "ritual" or "religious" is easy because it requires no proof. If you said that the disk was a tool, you'd be required to specify what the tool was and what it was used for. But you're not required to say what ritual, or how the item was used in the ritual. It's a different standard of proof. It would be better if archeologists admitted that they don't know what the thing is for, until there's more evidence or better understanding of the culture.
  • usrusr 6y ago
    Thinking of rituals and rationalism as polar opposites is the projection that shouldn't be applied. Ancient rituals should be seen as an early encoding of knowledge, not as an antithesis to rationalism. Some of that knowledge, or perhaps much of it, must have been utterly wrong if it only evolved through random mutations, deliberate nonconformism and natural selection. But it's easy to see how a group with the ritual of "eat your dead" would soon be displaced by a group with the ritual of "cook your dead before eating" who would still be outperformed in the long run by a group with "hide your dead somewhere where they can't give you nasty infections". If you have never heard of a distinction between the natural and the supernatural then every learned act is a ritual and every ritual is a productive act. Sure there's a tendency to dismiss every artifact that doesn't have an obvious purpose as ritualistic in the most hand-wavy way imaginable, but it's not wrong, it's just a bit too easy perhaps.
    • marcus_holmes 6y ago
      This is the thing. I don't understand where that interpretation of ancient culture comes from (except Victorian attitudes, of course). These are biologically modern humans we're talking about. They're as smart as us, as curious as us. They have a working knowledge of crafts that would put modern artisans to shame. They make beautiful, intricate, functional items. For instance, they understand the movement of the stars well enough to make a functional calendar. Why do we assume that they're irrational and ritualistic? What evidence do we have for that? What evidence do we have that they can't make a distinction between the natural and the supernatural? And yes, I think interpreting everything we don't understand the purpose of as "ritualistic" is not only wrong, it's actually harming our understanding of these people.
  • mrzool 6y ago
    So you trust archeologists without a second thought when they say that this object was used as a calendar, but you suddenly don't trust them anymore when they tell you it also had a religious function? > I think it's much, much more the other way around. Modern archaeologists have inherited their Victorian predecessors attitudes, who tended to look on primitive societies as backward and superstitious; "nasty, brutal and short". Looks like you have an underlying prejudice against history and archeology practitioners, you already thought about these issues and you already have strong opinions on them. That explains your first comment. You might very well have your reasons in thinking this, but when you say > I don't think there's much evidence to support this. Lots of speculation and interpretation, but not much actual evidence. I'm sorry, but I really don't know what to tell you. Saying that there's "evidence" would be an understatement. Just pick up whatever history book. I suggest you read about pre-Colombian societies in central America, or shamanism in Africa, or even about religion wars in Europe in the 15th and 16th century. Just to get you started…